Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="SU2NASA, post: 1311437, member: 800"]
This is what I was able to find:
[URL]http://dailyorange.com/2006/12/name-game-su-bound-to-carrier-for-the-dome-as-others-find-more-lucrative-deals/[/URL]

"Crouthamel said there is little Syracuse can do to take advantage of the Dome’s popularity by re-selling its naming rights to the highest bidder. He said there have been discussions with senior management at Carrier, but sees no reason for Carrier to acquiesce. And he doesn’t blame them because ‘it’s a business’ and Carrier originally took a risk to fund the Dome."

and this is interesting
"Carrier Corporation spokesman Jon Shaw said when Holm first agreed to contribute to the funding of the stadium it was not known Carrier would have its name become a part of the Dome’s title. Only after Holm announced his donation was the deal for the Dome naming right negotiated."

Personally, I think it was a mistake to name the field "Ernie Davis Legends Field".  That had naming right potential right there.  Similar to "Capital One Field at Byrd Stadium".  I think between Ernie Davis Hall, the statue, the movie, and everything else, Ernie Davis has been properly honored without the field.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?